[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140823152240.GH25918@moon>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 19:22:40 +0400
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Julien Tinnes <jln@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ipc/shm: fix the historical/wrong mm->start_stack
check
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 04:43:27PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> The ->start_stack check in do_shmat() looks ugly and simply wrong.
>
> 1. ->start_stack is only valid right after exec(), the application
> can switch to another stack and even unmap this area.
>
> 2. The reason for this check is not clear at all. The application
> should know what it does. And why 4 pages? And why in fact it
> requires 5 pages?
>
> 3. This wrongly assumes that the stack can only grown down.
>
> Personally I think we should simply kill this check, but I did not
> dare to do this. So the patch only fixes the 1st problem (mostly to
> avoid the usage of mm->start_stack) and ignores VM_GROWSUP.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Reviewed-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
I don't understand this check either, the comment above it says nothing
but only commits what code is doing not explaining why.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists